HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-07-01 City Council Summary Minutes Special Meeting July 1, 1996 1. Interviews for Planning Commission....................79-353 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS........................................79-354 APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF APRIL 8, 1996.......................79-354 1. Contract between the City of Palo Alto and BFI of California, Inc. for Regional Water Quality Control Plant Screening Disposal..............................................79-354 2. The Policy and Services Committee recommends approval of the staff recommendation re the North County Fire Services Consolidation Study that Council authorize the City Manager or her designee to continue to pursue opportunities for functional consolidations and/or mutually beneficial agreements with neighboring jurisdictions as outlined in the staff report (CMR:257:96).............................79-354 AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS...................79-354 4. Conference with Labor Negotiator......................79-355 5. Resolution Authorizing the Execution of an Agreement for the Selection of Governing Board Members for the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Group 2 Cities........79-355 5A. Resolution Amending Utility Rate Schedules W-1 and W-4 of the City of Palo Alto Utilities Rates and Charges Pertaining to General Water Service.................................79-356 6. Proposal to Provide Contract Fire Services to the City of Los Altos and the Los Altos County Fire Protection District79-357 6A. (Old Item No. 3) The Policy and Services Committee recommends that the Council approve the amended policies and procedures stated in the City of Palo Alto Legislative Action Program Handbook. Further, to approve the legislative positions compiled as the City of Palo Alto Legislative Platform79-363
07/01/96 79-351
7. Council Comments, Questions, and Announcements........79-363 ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 8:33 p.m. to a Closed Session 79-363 FINAL ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m.......79-364
07/01/96 79-352
07/01/96 79-353
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Conference Room at 6:20 p.m. PRESENT: Fazzino, Huber (arrived 6:22 p.m.), Kniss, McCown, Rosenbaum, Schneider, Simitian, Wheeler ABSENT: Andersen SPECIAL MEETINGS 1. Interviews for Planning Commission ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 7:40 p.m.
07/01/96 79-354
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at 7:45 p.m. PRESENT: Fazzino, Huber, Kniss, McCown, Rosenbaum, Schneider, Simitian, Wheeler ABSENT: Andersen ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Edmund Power, 2254 Dartmouth Street, spoke regarding civic accountability. Ben Bailey, 343 Byron Street, spoke regarding lack of response to a properly submitted complaint of police abuses. Marilyn Mayo, 404 Oxford Avenue, spoke regarding representing the Palo Alto Civic League. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF APRIL 8, 1996 MOTION: Council Member Fazzino moved, seconded by Schneider, to approve the Minutes of April 8, 1996, as submitted. MOTION PASSED 8-0, Andersen absent. CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION: Vice Mayor Huber moved, seconded by McCown, to approve Consent Calendar Item Nos. 1 and 2. 1. Contract between the City of Palo Alto and BFI of California, Inc. for Regional Water Quality Control Plant Screening Disposal 2. The Policy and Services Committee recommends approval of the staff recommendation re the North County Fire Services Consolidation Study that Council authorize the City Manager or her designee to continue to pursue opportunities for functional consolidations and/or mutually beneficial agreements with neighboring jurisdictions as outlined in the staff report (CMR:257:96). MOTION PASSED 8-0 for Item Nos. 1 and 2, Andersen absent. AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS City Manager June Fleming announced that Item No. 3 had been removed from the Consent Calendar and would become Item No. 6A. CLOSED SESSION The item might occur during the recess or after the Regular Meeting.
07/01/96 79-355
Public Comments None. 4. Conference with Labor Negotiator Agency Negotiator: City Council Ad Hoc Personnel Committee (Chairperson Joe Huber, Dick Rosenbaum, and Lanie Wheeler) Unrepresented Employees: City Attorney Ariel Calonne, City Auditor Bill Vinson, City Clerk Gloria Young, and City Manager June Fleming
Authority: Government Code ∋54957.6 RESOLUTIONS 5. Resolution Authorizing the Execution of an Agreement for the Selection of Governing Board Members for the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Group 2 Cities Director of Planning and Community Environment Ken Schreiber said the Cities of Palo Alto, Los Altos, Mountain View, Santa Clara, Sunnyvale, and the Town of Los Altos Hills shared three seats on the Board of Directors of the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (SCVTA). SCVTA was the successor agency to the Santa Clara County (the County) Transit District and the County Congestion Management Agency. The recommendation in the staff report (CMR:326:96) was developed in 1995 by elected officials from the six cities, including Council Member McCown. The recommendation extended the current Board seat allocation formula for 10 years from the Year 2000 to 2009. Sunnyvale rejected the agreement, but the other cities approved it. If Palo Alto approved the agreement and Sunnyvale maintained its opposition, the North County elected officials involved with the SCVTA would need to discuss the situation. A possible outcome would be to continue the current seat allocation formula to the Year 1999, and the elected officials could deal with it at that time. Another possible outcome was to convince Sunnyvale that the current system was equitable and that Sunnyvale should change its position. Council Member McCown said unfortunately, the Sunnyvale City Council members who dealt with the SCVTA issue in 1990 when the current selection system was put in place and the two Sunnyvale City Council members who participated in discussions in 1995 which led to the current proposal were no longer there. She had received a copy of the Sunnyvale staff memo to the Sunnyvale City Council, which left that Council with the impression that the rotation was different from what was agreed to in 1990. The chart used as the basis for the rotation had been in public circulation since 1990, but she was not sure that would have changed what Sunnyvale did.
07/01/96 79-356
She recommended approval of the agreement. There would be a chance
to speak with Sunnyvale about what that city=s ideas of greater representation would mean as far as the carefully crafted system that had worked well for the first 10 years of the process. MOTION: Council Member McCown moved, seconded by Fazzino, to adopt the Resolution and approve the Agreement.
Resolution 7605 entitled ΑResolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Authorizing the Execution of an Agreement for the Selection of Governing Board Members for the Santa
Clara Valley Transportation Authority Group 2 Cities≅ Joint Powers Agreement among the Cities of Palo Alto, Los Altos, Mountain View, Santa Clara, Sunnyvale, and the Town of Los Altos Hills for the Selection of Governing Board Members for the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Group 2
Council Member Simitian asked whether it was ΑAgency,≅ ΑAuthority,≅ or both. Council Member McCown said the official name was Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority. MOTION PASSED 8-0, Andersen absent. 5A. Resolution Amending Utility Rate Schedules W-1 and W-4 of the City of Palo Alto Utilities Rates and Charges Pertaining to General Water Service Mayor Wheeler said the City Council voted to increase the water rates at its meeting of June 24, 1996, as a policy matter. The proposed fees before Council were contained in the Resolution. MOTION: Council Member Schneider moved, seconded by McCown, to adopt the Resolution.
Resolution 7606 entitled ΑResolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Utility Rate Schedules W-1 and W-4 of the City of Palo Alto Utilities Rates and Charges
Pertaining to General Water Service≅ MOTION PASSED 6-2, Huber, Kniss Αno,≅ Andersen absent. REPORTS OF OFFICIALS 6. Proposal to Provide Contract Fire Services to the City of Los Altos and the Los Altos County Fire Protection District City Manager June Fleming said in the request for proposal (RFP) issued by the City of Los Altos, there was the unique requirement that the city council of a bidder actually endorse the proposal and
07/01/96 79-357
indicate knowledge of staff=s submittal of the proposal. Because of a tight time line, staff submitted its response and indicated to Los Altos that the item would appear on a future Palo Alto Council agenda for endorsement. Fire Chief Ruben Grijalva said the year-long study conducted by Ralph Andersen and Associates looked at consolidating a North County Fire Protection District or North County Fire Department involving the jurisdictions of Mountain View, Palo Alto, Los Altos, and the Los Altos County Fire Protection District. Item 2 of the Consent Calendar of the Agenda was the study results which were delivered to the Policy and Services (P&S) Committee in May. The study showed that it did not make either economical or operational sense to utilize the joint powers authority (JPA) form of consolidation. From the results of the study, Los Altos issued an RFP for fire protection services. Palo Alto responded with a proposal, and Los Altos staff indicated that each item would have
to be detailed in an agreement. Palo Alto=s proposal offered to provide the same level of service to Los Altos and the Los Altos County Fire Protection District as currently provided to Palo Alto, Stanford University, and Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC). The estimated costs were based on 1996-97 projections, and the proposal was based on actual costs. Terms of an agreement would be based on actual cost plus an allocated overhead charge that would be added based on a formula determined by the Administrative Services Department. The financial impact of the proposal was an estimated annual revenue of $300,000 for Palo Alto and an estimated annual savings of $300,000, which would be allocated between Los Altos and the Los Altos County Fire Protection District. That allocation mechanism had not yet been developed. The proposal also offered two separate proposals for dispatching services, one for fire only and the other for police. If the police dispatching were chosen by Los Altos, then there might be some additional savings for that city. Staff believed the proposal made good financial and operational sense. The possibility of more regional cooperation in emergency services had been looked into for years. The added depth of the additional resources would enhance the ability to provide first-class emergency services. The services to the Palo Alto citizens in the hills and the Los Altos Hills citizens would be greatly enhanced in terms of the number of resources on an initial response. Two years before, the Hughes, Heiss & Associates (HHA) report identified that the Palo Alto Fire Department (PAFD) had the ability to respond to additional calls. Staff believed that the services in Palo Alto would not suffer but in fact would be enhanced on multiple alarm calls in terms of the amount of resources that would be available. Council Member Schneider said a week before, the City of Santa
Clara=s paramedic service was shut down by Santa Clara County (the County). She asked whether that was something Palo Alto might expect.
07/01/96 79-358
Mr. Grijalva said that issue was separate and related specifically to the delivery of paramedic transport. The County had not
objected to Santa Clara=s providing Αfirst responder≅ paramedics. Currently, Palo Alto was the only city in the County that had been grandfathered in to provide transport services. In fact, transport was not recommended in the proposal until the case pending before the California Supreme Court was decided. Vice Mayor Huber clarified the reason for the income was that Palo Alto would be able to charge overhead costs that the City would otherwise be paying for. Mr. Grijalva said yes. There were three mechanisms for the overhead charges contained in the proposal. The first was based on
Palo Alto=s allocated costs that were currently charged to the PAFD budget. Staff subtracted the amount from the $1.33 million allocation currently paid for by contract with Stanford and eliminated the number of positions that Stanford paid for. Staff then added the 28 new employees from Los Altos who would become
part of the City of Palo Alto=s employee workforce and recalculated the overhead cost or allocated cost based on the new number of employees. When divided by the number of employees, the amount came to $8,500 per employee. The second was direct charges of existing management staff, which was determined to be one-half of a full-time equivalent (FTE). The reason it was one-half of an FTE was that in the proposal one full-time battalion chief would be added in the proposal to monitor the contract and to liaise between Palo Alto and Los Altos. The third was allocated cost for dispatch employees if Los Altos decided to take the police option. Those mechanisms combined together in the proposal totaled approximately $317,000. Vice Mayor Huber clarified the proposal was for a period of 25 years. Mr. Grijalva said yes. The proposal was drafted for a 25-year
agreement, and either party could end the agreement with 3 years= written notification without cause. Vice Mayor Huber asked what the downside was for the City of Palo Alto. Mr. Grijalva did not believe there was a downside. Staff had been looking at opportunities for a more regional approach to services. There would be an increase in services for Los Altos Hills and Los
Altos. There also would be an increase in Palo Alto=s ability to respond to multiple alarms, adding depth to the resources available to Palo Alto. Those resources on one communications channel would enhance communications, better response times, and a continuing standardized training. Palo Alto currently responded to the City of Los Altos and Los Altos Hills as part of a mutual aid agreement.
07/01/96 79-359
For example, Palo Alto sent 24 fire personnel to a fire in Los Altos Hills without compensation as part of the automatic mutual aid process. Ms. Fleming said there was a reality of a larger constituency to deal with when it came to concerns about fire services. She did not see that as a downside because given the quality of services provided, Palo Alto received very little, if any, negative response about the services. Mayor Wheeler understood the firefighters from the Los Altos/Los Alto Hills area would become City of Palo Alto employees. She asked if the City Council would then become the decision-making body for Los Altos and Los Altos Hills in terms of the level of
fire service they received and in the employees= wages and benefits package and the memorandum of understanding that were negotiated. If so, she asked how Palo Alto would work that out with Los Altos Hills and Los Altos. Mr. Grijalva said it would not be different from when Stanford University had its own fire department and its own employees who became employees of Palo Alto. The Palo Alto City Council would make decisions with regard to wages, benefits, and all employee issues. The Palo Alto City Council would not become the governing body with regard to codes and regulations, e.g., which fire code to adopt and which codes were enforced. Those would be the responsibility of Los Altos and Los Altos Hills. Ms. Fleming said staff had talked for years about ways to be more cooperative in regional approaches to services. Palo Alto was making a drastic move that would not go unnoticed and that said Palo Alto was serious about regionalism. Council Member Rosenbaum commended the Fire Chief for the proposal which was the lowest bid. The savings of roughly $600,000 would be achieved by a reduction of ten people, six of whom were firefighters. The public had to be convinced that with fewer firefighters, the City not only would maintain service in Palo Alto but also would improve service in Los Altos. He asked how that could be explained. Mr. Grijalva said the Palo Alto fire stations were not at capacity in the terms of the number of responses. Currently, Los Altos and Los Altos Hills responded with 8 people on a first alarm residential structure assignment before calling for mutual and automatic aid. That aid came from a farther distance, usually from Palo Alto. The level of service would be enhanced in that Los Altos and Los Altos Hills would be receiving 15 people on a first alarm assignment and 18 people during the wildland fire season when Station 8 opened up in the Foothills, which was what Los Altos/Los Altos Hills currently received based on a mutual aid agreement. The resources would be the same and would be coming from the same
07/01/96 79-360
locations, except Los Altos and Los Altos Hills would be receiving a larger number of resources, would be better coordinated because they would be trained the same, would be on the same communications frequency, and would be trained to fight fires in the aggressive manner that Palo Alto did.
Council Member Rosenbaum understood why it was to Los Altos= advantage. However, if there were a structure fire in Palo Alto, a rescue vehicle and a ladder truck would respond. If those two vehicles were busy with a structure fire in Los Altos, they would not be available in Palo Alto. He asked if that should be a concern. Mr. Grijalva said the issue was simultaneous calls and how often Palo Alto had simultaneous working structure fires in Los Altos and in Palo Alto. The depth that would be added to the organization by adding additional resources would be available even during simultaneous calls. There would be adequate resources to send in a quick manner to each location. Palo Alto did occasionally require mutual aid. For example, at the fire at Town and Country Village about a week before, there were engines from Los Altos and Mountain View. Those resources would continue. The whole idea behind regionalization, even if not through contracting but through automatic and mutual aid, was to allow a large number of resources to respond to a single-family or commercial structure fire and not have each jurisdiction pay for those resources. While fighting the fire at Los Altos Hills, Palo Alto was responding on a structure call at a high-rise building in Palo Alto and on a choking child call in Palo Alto. Palo Alto handled all those emergencies in a more than proficient response time. Council Member Schneider asked what the number of new Palo Alto employees would be. Mr. Grijalva said there were 28 possible new Palo Alto employees. Council Member Schneider asked about the pay comparison between
their employees and Palo Alto=s employees. Mr. Grijalva said their pay was currently substantially lower than
any of the bidders. Palo Alto=s proposal would bring them over
step to step, e.g., a firefighter engineer at ΑB≅ step from Los
Altos would become a firefighter engineer at ΑB≅ step in Palo Alto. That meant a significant increase in salary to the firefighters from Los Altos. Council Member Schneider asked whether the firefighters from Los Altos were represented by a union and whether they would become
part of Palo Alto=s bargaining unit.
07/01/96 79-361
Tony Spitaleri, President, International Association of Firefighters Local 1319, said currently they were members of their own International Association of Firefighters (IAFF). Once they became Palo Alto employees, they would drop that membership and become members of Local 1319. Council Member Schneider asked if 100 percent of the Los Altos/Los Altos Hills firefighters were union members. Mr. Spitaleri said yes. MOTION: Council Member Fazzino moved, seconded by Schneider, to authorize the Mayor to sign a letter of endorsement required by the Request for Proposal (RFP) for fire protection services from the City of Los Altos and the Los Altos County Fire Protection District. Further, to authorize the City Manager or her designee to negotiate a mutually beneficial agreement with the City of Los Altos and the Los Altos County Fire Protection District as outlined in the proposal, should Palo Alto be selected from those responding to the RFP. Council Member Fazzino said a year and a half before, he was hopeful to include Mountain View in a Mid-Peninsula fire district, which did not work for a variety of reasons. The Fire Department deserved great credit for the proposal, and it was a demonstration
of the Fire Chief=s leadership. He also applauded Mr. Spitaleri
for the union=s efforts to work jointly with the Palo Alto Police Department (PAPD) and Los Altos and Los Altos Hills. He supported the proposal and applauded the other cities for their efforts in improving fire services for residents of the Mid-Peninsula. Council Member Kniss was pleased to see the proposal because it would make a big difference in the economy of running a fire
department long term. She agreed with Council Member Fazzino=s comments and supported the motion. Mayor Wheeler said when Council was having HHA discussions, some placed more emphasis than others on realizing some savings out of that study, and some were concerned about the potential impact on
services when it came to public safety personnel. Staff=s proposal might be the solution that satisfied both sides of that equation, and she appreciated the work done. The City was a considerable way from having an agreement, even in principle, from the two entities involved and making it a reality. She thanked staff and felt staff had represented the City of Palo Alto in fire services extremely well through the proposal document and through the staff report (CMR:327:96). MOTION PASSED 8-0, Andersen absent.
07/01/96 79-362
6A. (Old Item No. 3) The Policy and Services Committee recommends that the Council approve the amended policies and procedures stated in the City of Palo Alto Legislative Action Program Handbook. Further, to approve the legislative positions compiled as the City of Palo Alto Legislative Platform and, at the end of 1996, the Policy and Services Committee would develop a 1997 Legislative Platform. An annual item would appear on Policy and Services Committee's agenda for a review of the City's Legislative positions. Council Member Simitian said by taking the recommended action, it was not the intention of the Policy and Services (P&S) Committee or the Council to adopt or reconfirm support for the previously adopted policies or programs of the City. Rather, it was simply to acknowledge that those were the policies of the City of Palo Alto as previously stated. That was the minor but important distinction he wanted on record so there would not be debate about any policy options that Council had adopted over the years or any culpability for any of the positions that individual Council Members might or might not want to support if and when they came before Council. Assistant to the City Manager Vicci Rudin clarified that Council Member Simitian was referring to the second part of the recommendation. MOTION: Council Member Simitian moved, seconded by Rosenbaum, to: 1) approve the amended policies and procedures stated in the City of Palo Alto Legislative Action Program Handbook and 2) acknowledge the Council legislative positions compiled as the City of Palo Alto Legislative Platform. MOTION PASSED 8-0, Andersen absent. COUNCIL MATTERS 7. Council Comments, Questions, and Announcements Mayor Wheeler reminded the public of the Chili Cook-off at Mitchell Park on Thursday, July 4, 1996. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 8:33 p.m. to a Closed Session. The City Council met in Closed Session to discuss matters involving labor negotiation as described in Agenda Item No. 4. Mayor Wheeler announced that no reportable action was taken on Agenda Item No.4. FINAL ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m. ATTEST: APPROVED:
07/01/96 79-363
City Clerk Mayor NOTE: Sense minutes (synopsis) are prepared in accordance with Palo Alto Municipal Code Sections 2.04.200 (a) and (b). The City Council and Standing Committee meeting tapes are made solely for the purpose of facilitating the preparation of the minutes of the meetings. City Council and Standing Committee meeting tapes are recycled 90 days from the date of the meeting. The tapes are available for members of the public to listen to during regular office hours.
07/01/96 79-364